From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Subject: Problems with network-route/vif-route scripts
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 17:17:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061026161750.GB28762@redhat.com> (raw)
I've been attempting to get the network-route/vif-route scripts running
instead of using the traditional bridging setup, but running into some
puzzelling issues.
I changed the network-script & vif-script settings in xend-config.sxp to
the appropriate values. In the guest config I set an explicit IP address
as required for routing vif = [ 'mac=00:16:3e:1e:7c:a6, ip=10.13.4.222' ]
And inside the guest, configured eth0 with the matching IP address. This
all works fine - the host can connect to the guest, and vica-verca.
Off-host communications to/from the guest are not getting any traffic.
I do have a regular Fedora iptables rulset loaded which denies all incoming
traffic except SSH, but the vif-route script adds a number of IPTables rules
which are supposed to deal with this, allowing all traffic to go straight
to the guest.
After a little debugging, I came across a couple of separate issues with
the vif-route script which all conspire to block off-host networking from
working as expected
- The iptables rule is only added to the FORWARD rule - it also needs
to be added to the INPUT rule, otherwise Dom0 firwall rules will hit
DomU traffic too
- The iptables rule is added to the end of the FORWARD rule, so if you
have an existing catch all DENY/REJECT rule already, the Xen rule
will never get matched
- The rule is using '-m physdev --physdev-in $vif' to match guest traffic.
The 'physdev' module rules, however, only match on interfaces which are
part of a network bridge - obviously not the case for routed networking
config, so even at the correct location in FORWARD they don't match
- While the guest can transmit, it never receives anything back because
the remote hosts can't do ARP lookups for the guest's IP address. The
vif-route script turns on proxy_arp on the $vif, but the proxy_arp setting
is also needed on the Dom0's public interface (eg eth0)
Based on this it would seem we need to change the current
iptables -A FORWARD --source $ip -m physdev --physdev-in $vif -j ACCEPT
To instead do
iptables -I INPUT --source $ip -i $vif -j ACCEPT
iptables -I FORWARD --source $ip -i $vif -j ACCEPT
Since this stuff is dealt with in vif-common.sh it looks like we'll need to
remove that commonality between route & bridge scripts.
And add some logic to network-route which does
dev=....discover primary public interface...
sysctl -w net.ipv4.conf.$dev.proxy_arp = 1
I'm rather wondering if I've missed something incredibly stupid which would
avoid all these issues, but it certainly seems that the current vif-route
scripts just won't work in their current state
Regards,
Dan.
--
|=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=|
|=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=|
|=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=|
|=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|
next reply other threads:[~2006-10-26 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-26 16:17 Daniel P. Berrange [this message]
2006-10-30 2:08 ` Problems with network-route/vif-route scripts John McCullough
2006-10-30 3:22 ` Daniel P. Berrange
2006-10-30 10:22 ` Ian Pratt
2006-11-15 2:48 ` Daniel P. Berrange
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061026161750.GB28762@redhat.com \
--to=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.